A recent decision from Louisiana’s First Circuit Court of Appeal sends a strong and familiar message to construction industry participants: if you agree to arbitrate, expect to arbitrate—early and often. In Stantec Consulting Services Inc v. Kiewit Louisiana Co., 2025-0536 (La. App. 1 Cir. 12/30/25), 427 So.3d 796, the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal underscores a clear trend in construction litigation: arbitration clauses are being enforced early and decisively—and can end a lawsuit before it begins. They are powerful tools that can shut down litigation before it gains any traction.

Project Background and the Dispute Framework

The Stantec case arose from a large U.S. Army Corps of Engineers project involving multiple contractors, engineers, and subcontractors. After substantial completion occurred in December 2017, the Army Corps asserted five separate claims regarding alleged problems and defects, which implicated work performed by certain subcontractors.

After the owner asserted defect claims against the general contractor, the contractor and several subcontractors—including Stantec—entered into a stand-alone arbitration agreement (also known as a submission when there is not an arbitration clause in the original underlying agreements) to allocate responsibility among themselves; any disputes among the parties were to be arbitrated by a panel of three arbitrators before JAMS with the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) Construction Industry Arbitration and Mediation Procedures to be applicable unless otherwise agreed in an amendment signed by all parties.

Attempt to Circumvent Arbitration

Despite that agreement, the subcontractors filed a declaratory judgment action in Louisiana state court requesting a ruling that certain claims were perempted and therefore outside the scope of arbitration. In response, the general contractor filed a dilatory exception of prematurity, arguing that the arbitration agreement required all disputes to be resolved through arbitration before any court involvement.

Court Enforcement of a Broad Arbitration Clause

Both the trial court and the appellate court agreed by holding that the arbitration agreement covered “any disputes” related to the project, sustaining the exception of prematurity and dismissing the lawsuit without prejudice. The First Circuit rejected the argument that certain issues—like peremption—should be decided by a court before arbitration given the broadness of the arbitration clause at issue. Instead, the appellate court held that:

• the arbitration agreement’s broad language encompassed all claims and defenses;
• incorporation of arbitral rules (AAA) reflected an intent to delegate threshold issues to the arbitrator; and
• any doubts should be resolved in favor of arbitration under Louisiana and federal policy.

Key Takeaways for Construction Industry Participants

The Stantec decision reinforces several practical lessons:

• Broad arbitration clauses will be enforced as written.
• Courts are increasingly willing to defer even threshold legal issues to arbitrators.
• Attempts to bypass arbitration through litigation are unlikely to succeed.

Ultimately, the decision reaffirms the power of a properly drafted arbitration clause to stop litigation in its infancy. Arbitration clauses are not merely procedural formalities but can be dispositive of litigation and should be approached with the same level of care and precision as any other critical contract term.

See the full decision here: Stantec Consulting Services Inc v. Kiewit Louisiana Co.

Crystal Burkhalter is senior counsel in Kean Miller’s Construction, Labor, Insurance, Intellectual Property, and Commercial Litigation practice, based in the firm’s Baton Rouge office. She brings three decades of experience handling complex commercial and construction disputes. Crystal represents contractors, developers, and industrial clients in high-stakes litigation, arbitration, and risk management matters across state and federal courts.